+- The UK Babe Channels Forum (https://www.babeshows.co.uk)
+-- Forum: Channels (/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: UK Babe Channels (/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+---- Forum: Broadcasting Regulations (/forumdisplay.php?fid=138)
+---- Thread: Porn Filters (/showthread.php?tid=45765)
RE: Porn Filters - mido - 25-07-2013 20:58
oh and before you ask Scotty, yes i did sign the petition
RE: Porn Filters - admiral decker - 25-07-2013 22:01
(25-07-2013 19:43 )Scottishbloke Wrote: Current total for this petition now sits at 20,333
I think we can make the 100,000 signatures required, great news to read that speed is picking up fast, one step at a time. I'll make no bold predictions but Cameron the twat (the same guy that accidently left his own child behind in a restaurant) has got a real potential battle on his hands now. Good to see the people fighting back for a change.
The number of adults in this country with broadband is over 37 million. I don't think Cameron is going to be quaking in his boots just yet, although 20,000 isn't a bad start.
RE: Porn Filters - mido - 25-07-2013 23:03
i wonder how many of the 20,000 who have signed up so far are minors
RE: Porn Filters - marlowe - 26-07-2013 10:14
(25-07-2013 19:43 )Scottishbloke Wrote: I'll make no bold predictions but Cameron the twat (the same guy that accidently left his own child behind in a restaurant) has got a real potential battle on his hands now. Good to see the people fighting back for a change.
It was the people who wanted these filters in the first place.
The original petition on this subject, calling for the filters to be introduced, reached it's 100,000 target quickly and was symbolically handed in to 10 Downing Street last September.
RE: Porn Filters - davy crockett - 26-07-2013 12:21
(25-07-2013 18:45 )The Silent Majority Wrote: As long as it's not child porn or anything else illegal, why should he be worried?
As he only turned the filter off to speed up his internet browsing I doubt that he's seen anything illegal.
RE: Porn Filters - The Silent Majority - 27-07-2013 21:22
A satirical look at Cameron's porn filter
7.50 into the show.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03775gn
RE: Porn Filters - Rammyrascal - 27-07-2013 21:27
just listened, very funny
RE: Porn Filters - Matsui - 27-07-2013 22:23
(26-07-2013 10:14 )marlowe Wrote: It was the people who wanted these filters in the first place.
The original petition on this subject, calling for the filters to be introduced, reached it's 100,000 target quickly and was symbolically handed in to 10 Downing Street last September.
And yet in a government-launched consultation last year, only 35% of parents supported the introduction of default filtering.
So this government totally ignored it’s own consultation and went ahead with the plans anyway… nanny knows best after all.
RE: Porn Filters - HannahsPet - 28-07-2013 06:23
(27-07-2013 22:23 )Matsui Wrote:Just ones reason why mumsnet they hold too much power and influence in the media which is daft cos I bet most of there number wouldn't or couldn't be arsed to vote in an election(26-07-2013 10:14 )marlowe Wrote: It was the people who wanted these filters in the first place.
The original petition on this subject, calling for the filters to be introduced, reached it's 100,000 target quickly and was symbolically handed in to 10 Downing Street last September.
And yet in a government-launched consultation last year, only 35% of parents supported the introduction of default filtering.
So this government totally ignored it’s own consultation and went ahead with the plans anyway… nanny knows best after all.
In principle not against filters but dont like the mandatory block all approach. Also dont like governments saying what people can and cant see how would we know if they were blocking other things they dont like
The main threat to kids is twitter and facebook and cyberbullying more kids have died from killing themselves cos of that but nothing about that thats prob cos mumsnet mums spend 90 % of the lives attached to there phones tweetin and facebooking
RE: Porn Filters - mido - 28-07-2013 07:57
(28-07-2013 06:23 )HannahsPet Wrote: Just ones reason why mumsnet they hold too much power and influence in the media which is daft cos I bet most of there number wouldn't or couldn't be arsed to vote in an election
In principle not against filters but dont like the mandatory block all approach. Also dont like governments saying what people can and cant see how would we know if they were blocking other things they dont like
The main threat to kids is twitter and facebook and cyberbullying more kids have died from killing themselves cos of that but nothing about that thats prob cos mumsnet mums spend 90 % of the lives attached to there phones tweetin and facebooking
I have only given it a quick scan but the forum on mumsnet actually gives a very balanced view on this, whilst most mums are seeing this as an attempt to block pictures of child abuse and in favor of it, there is also a strong sense that this is the wrong way of handling it or a step too far, citing how regular websites have become blocked by current filters
http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/in_the_news/a1808633-That-bloody-ISP-porn-filter-bollocks-is-back-again
Its an interesting point about "cyber bullying" on facebook and twitter though, im sure if word got out that these would end up blocked there would be national outcry